An Empirical Study On The Application Of Punitive Damages For Buying Fake Products On Purpose

Buying fake products on purpose is to point to the behavior that the purchaser still chooses to buy under the actual circumstance that the commodity is counterfeit and shoddy.As for whether the system of punitive damages can be applied or not,there is a big dispute between the theoretical and practical circles due to the lack of explicit provisions in the existing laws.The main discussion Angle has the law economics and the law sociology,the public law and the private law Angle carries on the discussion.In judicial practice,there are different attitudes towards the behavior of buying fake products on purpose.Some courts believe that the purpose of knowing fake and fighting fake is to make profits.This kind of "fighting fake" belongs to "fighting fake",which not only destroys the market order,but also increases the burden of judicial organs.Waste of judicial resources.However,some courts hold that the reason why fake goods are bought and sold is because of the existence of people who "make and sell fake goods".They support the punitive damages system for fake goods buying and selling,which can curb the spread of fake goods to some extent.Therefore,it is of great significance for the theory and judicial practice to study whether the punitive damages system can be applied to the fake behavior of buying fake products on purpose.The structure of this paper is mainly divided into three parts.The first part is the big data analysis of the judgment results of the cases of the disputes over the fake contracts.From 2014 to 2018,it collected the second instance judgment of cases concerning the dispute of the contract of knowing and buying fake goods.Through the summary of the judgment,descriptive statistics,analysis of the types of the plaintiff's anti-counterfeiting cases and the second instance of the rate of correction.The paper summarizes the three controversial focuses identified by the court in the trial,including: the identity of consumers,the identification of "fraudulent behavior" and the identification of "loss";The second part is through the in-depth analysis of three typical cases,the above three points of dispute classification treatment and evaluation.Combining with the different views of domestic scholars on the above issues,this paper puts forward the main positions and views on this issue.The third part is on the basis of the above argumentation and analysis,put forward Suggestions to improve the relevant legislation.It is mainly aimed at three problems in the legislative aspects of the improvement.It is suggested that the concept of consumerscan be defined by means of reverse exclusion.It is clear that the "fraudulent behavior" in the "consumer rights and interests protection law" should be distinguished from the "fraud" in the "general provisions of the civil law" and "contract law",and clearly stipulates that as long as the operator has fraudulent behavior,it should constitute "fraudulent behavior".Improve the concept of "loss" in the consumer protection law.